1. In this appeal by the Union of India (Western Railway) the principal point submitted by Mr. Bapna is that the delinquent employee (plaintiff) was punished by minor penalty for demanding bribe and it was not necessary to give detailed order giving the reasons in the communication conveying the minor penalty. Mr. Bapna then argued that in any case if it was technical defect then the Court below should have allowed the defendant an opportunity to pass a fresh order according to law.

2. Mr. Jain appearing on behalf of the plaintiff respondent has not been able to show anything contrary, so far as the second objection is concerned.

3. I have considered the submission of Mr. Bapna. So far as the first contention is concerned I am not impressed and the same is rejected. Even in cases of minor penalty an order imposing penaly should give reasons for the same, so that the delinquent employee may apply his mind and file appeal and challenge it in the proper form The finding of the first appellate court in this respect is well reasoned and based on latest decisions of the apex court and calls for no interference.

4. So far as the second objection is concerned, I feel that in cases of